Do you think that’s wise, sir?

While that may have been Corporal Jones, some reaction of pundits came closer to invoking the spirit of Private Fraser: “We’re doomed!”

Meanwhile, I get the impression some financial advisers will be more in tune with Dad’s Army’s bank manager Captain Mainwaring who would no doubt be rubbing his hands at thought of all the investment advice he could give to his customers.

So what should we make of Mr Woodford’s decision to leave Invesco Perpetual at the end of April 2014, after 25 years?

Chelsea Financial Services immediately downgraded his funds from buy to hold going so far as to remove High Income from its Core Selection list of favourite funds.

Hargreaves Lansdown’s Mark Dampier assured clients: “We believe investors need not consider selling the fund now and I myself will be remaining invested.”

I hope he is equally forthcoming if and when he changes his mind and decides to sell.

A change of fund manager is always a worrying time for investors and their advisers; with someone of Mr Woodford’s stature it is all the more important.

He is the country’s best known manager with more than £34bn under his control.

The options are many: sit it out until the change, give the new man a try, move to a fund with an established track record, or follow Mr Woodford to his new home?

No one approach is guaranteed success: Fidelity Special Situations and Anthony Bolton being a prime example of damned if you do, damned if you do not.

Despite his success Mr Woodford is not to everyone’s taste. His preference for tobacco firms has put off some investors even if they are not of an ethical bent.

And his superstar rating has not necessarily been reflected in more recent performance. Trustnet figures show IP Income returning 80 per cent in the past five years against 81 per cent for the UK Equity Income sector average.

Over three years he has outperformed by 41 per cent to 35 per cent, but over a year he is more or less on average.

In fact the only clear period of outperformance in the past five years was in months 24 to 36.

That is not to knock Mr Woodford who has delivered fantastic returns to his long-term investors.

But there must be a feeling that he has chosen to jump ship to release him from the restrictions of steering his investment super tanker.

Perhaps before retiring he wants once again to captain a sleek racing yacht as he used to before so many leapt aboard his IP funds.

Perhaps before retiring Neil Woodford wants once again to captain a sleek racing yacht as he used to before so many leapt aboard his IP funds

____________________________________________________________________________

Benefits of FCA transparency

The financial services industry took another step along the transparency road on October 13, the date from which the FCA will publish enforcement warning notices.

The FCA said in its policy statement: “Consumer groups were strongly in favour while industry respondents mostly thought that the benefits of early transparency would be outweighed by the potential for reputational harm.”

It is strange how they only consider the potential for reputational harm when an enforcement notice is looming and not when a sales practice is being hatched.

Just imagine the reputational harm that could have been avoided if firms had adopted a more considered approach to selling payment protection insurance, pensions and precipice bonds.

The FCA says the new rules align the stage at which publicity is given in regulatory cases with the stage at which publicity is given in civil and criminal cases – and that is how it should be.

So consumers and firms will now be told of unacceptable behaviour earlier. And in most cases firms will be named, which will allow consumers to decide whether they still wish to conduct business with that firm.

In some cases the name of the firm will be withheld and in most cases individuals will retain anonymity.

Make no mistake, this is real progress. The opacity of the old system encouraged distrust of both the regulator and industry.

Some individuals may still be unhappy but in the long run the whole industry will benefit from this change.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Delivering for investors

So what was behind the Royal Mail share-selling frenzy? Clearly many had sought merely to stag the shares, selling at the first opportunity.

But I wonder how many, like me, had intended to keep them, but then decided that the costs of having such a small holding on a platform made selling the only sensible option.

Result: Royal Mail will end up primarily in the hands of institutions but small investors have pocketed enough to pay for the rising cost of stamps for a few Christmases hence.